Points-based licensing and violations reduction for airfield drivers

¶ … ASSIGNING POINTS to AIRFIELD DRIVERS LICENSE REDUCE NUMBER of DRIVING VIOLATIONS?

The aviation industry has evolved from its humble origins just over a century ago to become one of the most important resources for many countries around the world today. Effective airport management and operations therefore represents one of the fundamental keys to success for this vital industry and much progress has been achieved in this area as well. Airports and their environs are typically occupy very large geographic areas, though, and many casual observers may not realize just how many ground vehicles are required to operate a typical airport facility. While much attention has been paid to aviation safety in the air, less attention has been directed at improving the safety of ground operations, including the incidence of vehicular accidents. Indeed, airfield drivers must navigate and veritable obstacle course that includes a number of potential hazards to themselves and others, and safe driving is an absolute essential ingredient in the effective operations of airport facilities today. Unfortunately, there remains a paucity of research concerning what initiatives might prove effective in improving the safety performance of airfield drivers, which represents the focus of this study. To this end, a review of the relevant peer-reviewed, scholarly, governmental and organizational literature together with the results of a custom survey of a representative sampling of currently employed airfield drivers concerning their views about the assignment of points to improve driving performance is provided in this regard, followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the concluding chapter.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Statement of the Problem

Purpose of Study

Importance of Study

Overview of Study

Definitions of Key Terms

Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature

Chapter 3: Methodology

Description of the Study Approach

Data-gathering Method and Database of Study

Chapter 4: Data Analysis

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

WOULD ASSIGNING POINTS to AIRFIELD DRIVERS LICENSE REDUCE NUMBER of DRIVING VIOLATIONS?

A number of airports around the world continue to measure their performance by using criteria based solely on profit measures or traffic growth rather than other metrics that reflect how safely they operate their facilities despite an increasing recognition by many airport managements concerning the financial and commercial implications of operating an airport (Doganis, 1999). According to this author, "Too frequently in the past governments have set their airports purely financial objectives such as the need to break even or obtain a specific rate of return on net assets. Only a few airports have developed a systematic approach towards measuring performance and even fewer airports include any performance indicators in their published accounts" (p. 37). Generally speaking, there remains a paucity of accepted industry practice for measuring airport performance including safety standards for airfield drivers, a situation that is in sharp contrast to many other industries and even the airline industry where standard performance indicators have now been widely adopted. Such safety performance metrics are essential for the effective operation of airports for several reasons (Doganis). One area that could potentially benefit from such safety performance metrics is the driving records of airfield drivers, and this issue is discussed further below.

Statement of the Problem

Runway incursion accidents remain a significant problem that affects the safe operation of the airports in the United States today. As airports become increasingly congested, airfield management as well as the entire aviation industry are required to pay increasingly closer attention to the safety of ground operations. The complexity of today's airfield operations have the potential for creating unsafe conditions, especially where aircraft and vehicles may find themselves on active runways in direct conflict with arriving and departing aircraft. Such runway incursions can have tragic results. While aircraft crossing taxiways or runways without clearance may be involved in many runway incursions, people driving vehicles on the movement area may also be involved in an airfield traffic accident. Although some airports employ driver training programs for airport personnel, it is typically assumed that airfield drivers are qualified to drive on the airport by virtue of their positions.

Purpose of Study

The purpose of the study was to determine, based on an extrapolation and synthesis of the relevant literature, whether assigning points to airfield drivers' licenses would reduce the number of driving violations, thereby improving the safety performance of the airport facility itself.

Importance of Study

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reports that in 2000, there were reports of more than 550 vehicle/pedestrian deviations (V/PDs) -- of which 85 resulted in runway incursions. Furthermore, vehicles and pedestrians operating on and adjacent to airport runways and taxiways without proper authorization can conflict with aircraft operations and may result in runway incursions. Despite the need, there are no graduated licensure penalties available for airfield drivers who are involved in runway incursions or other vehicular accidents as a result of negligence, with an "all-or-nothing" approach currently in place. Clearly, then, airfield operations are hazardous by nature, and identifying opportunities to improve the safe operation of the rolling stock that supports aircraft flight services represents a timely and important endeavor today.

Overview of Study

This paper used a five-chapter format to achieve the research purpose stated above. Chapter one of the study introduced the topic under consideration, a statement of the problem, the purpose and the importance of the study. Chapter two of the study is used to provide a critical review of the relevant peer-reviewed, scholarly, governmental and organizational literature, and chapter three describes more fully the study's methodology, as well as a description of the study approach, the data-gathering method and the database of study consulted. Chapter four consists of an analysis of the data developed during the research process and chapter five presents the study's conclusions, a summary of the research and salient recommendations for airport administrators.

Definitions of Key Terms

The following definitions used by the Federal Aviation Administration are also used for the purposes of the study:

Airfield: The area inside the airport perimeter fencing, it includes runways, taxiways, aprons, and safety areas.

Airfield Driver: Local term identifying a person properly trained and authorized to operate motor vehicles on an airfield.

Airfield Driver Authorization: An annotation on an airport issued security credential identifying the holder as authorized to drive on the airfield. Airfield drivers are authorized to operate vehicles in areas where their driver training and security credentials are valid.

Airfield Driver Training Course: A course of instruction that is designed to train airfield driver applicants in the rules and regulations for safe driving on the airfield.

FAA: Federal Aviation Administration

Vehicle: The terms vehicle and motorized ground vehicle are synonymous and refer to any self-propelled motor driven ground vehicle. It includes, but is not limited to automobiles, tugs and trucks of all sizes. This term also includes all ground support equipment, cycles, carts and scooters.

Vehicle Escort: Any vehicle or driver that does not have the appropriate training, insurance, registered vehicle, or current vehicle hangtag must be accompanied onto the airfield by a person and vehicle with valid airfield driver authorization.

Vehicle Operations Coordinator: A person with security responsibilities for a specific vehicle access gate(s). This individual is authorized to sign the application requesting driving privileges.

V/PD: Vehicle/Pedestrian Deviations

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature

Introduction

This chapter provides a review of the relevant literature concerning the aviation industry in general, point systems and drivers' licensure in the several states and abroad, and a discussion concerning current approaches to airfield driver regulation. A summary of the research concludes the chapter.

Background and Overview

Today, the commercial aviation industry represents one of the most important and strategic resources for many countries around the world, and flying has come to be widely accepted as being an expected part of a traveler's experience. According to O'Connor (2001), "Transportation is a basic part of the economic/social / cultural infrastructure, which affects the efficiency of all other business activities in a community and the quality of life of its residents and the ability to travel is prized by most people" (p. 4). The economic impact of the aviation industry is also highly significant for many regions of the country, with airlines supporting a wide range of ancillary enterprises and ground operations that contribute to a region's economy in substantive ways through the multiplier effect. Indeed, it would difficult for many people in the United States and in other countries around the world to imagine life without air transport today. In this environment, identifying opportunities to improve the safety of operations represents a timely and worthy enterprise, which is discussed further below.

Current Approaches to Airfield Driver Regulation

The FAA reports that the basic runway and taxiway configurations of many airports in the United States were constructed prior to the jet age. Since that time, the volume of operations and the speed and size of aircraft that are using the country's airports have increased significantly. Concomitantly, there has also been an increased risk of runway incursions as a result. One factor that can contribute to runway incursions is airport configuration. Although these pre-jet age airfields can and do safely accommodate large volumes of aircraft operations, the airfield has been a contributing factor in some runway incursions. To help overcome these constraints, carriers such as British Airways have recently adopted a "virtual airline model" as shown in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1. Alternative airline business models.

Source: Doganis, 2001, p. 216.

Whichever approach is employed, vehicle/pedestrian incursions remain a fundamental concern for airport management and law enforcement alike because in some cases, the vehicle or pedestrian conflicts with an aircraft landing or takeoff, resulting in a runway incursion. In fact, even if the vehicle or pedestrian does not enter a runway, the deviation can divert the controller's attention from aircraft and other vehicles, which could result in an incident or accident. A key to reducing V/PDs is to ensure that those personnel who are authorized to drive on the airfield possess the requisite knowledge to do so safely; however, because every airport facility is unique, the driver knowledge required will differ depending on the airport and where the person is authorized to drive on the airfield. For instance, an airfield driver who is authorized to drive on runways needs to be knowledgeable about procedures for radio communications; in contrast, a person authorized to drive only on ramps would normally not require this knowledge. As a general rule, the FAA recommends that airfield vehicle operators need to know, as appropriate, the following at a minimum:

Airport rules and regulations pertaining to vehicle operations,

Areas where they are authorized to drive and designated entrance and exit points to these areas,

Location of perimeter roads,

Boundaries of the movement vs. nonmovement areas on the airfield, airport layout, including designations of runways and taxiways,

Meaning of airfield signs, marking, and lighting,

Proper phraseology, including phonetic alphabet, procedures, and frequencies for radio communication

Meaning of light gun signals;

Traffic patterns associated with each runway and location of each leg (i.e., downwind, base, final, and crosswind)

Airfield Driver Training

In the United States, airport operators have the primary responsibility of ensuring that airfield drivers possess the requisite knowledge of the above items before authorizing them to drive on the airfield. For this purpose, the FAA highly recommends that those who drive on the airfield be provided initial and recurrent training on these subjects and points out that the importance of such training on a regular basis cannot be overemphasized.

Airfield Vehicle Requirements

Requirements for vehicles will also differ depending on the airport, the type of vehicle, and where it will be operated on the airport. Generally, a vehicle operating on runways and taxiways should, as a minimum, have the following:

Marking designating the identification of the vehicle (e.g., OPS-1)

Minimum equipment, which must be in proper working order, such as headlights, taillights, mirrors, a speedometer, etc.

A rotating beacon two-way radio with the aviation frequencies

Insurance coverage

Airfield Vehicular Operations

The airport-established rules or regulations should provide adequate procedures for the safe and orderly operation of vehicles on the airport. Items to consider include the following:

Requirements for vehicles on the movement area to be radio-equipped or escorted by a radio-equipped vehicle;

Speed limits;

Prohibition against careless and reckless operation;

Time periods when vehicle lights must be operated;

Requirement to use vehicle lanes and perimeter roads;

Locations where vehicles may or may not be parked and/or serviced;

Rules of right-of-way (i.e., aircraft, emergency vehicles, and other vehicles);

Requirements to report accidents involving ground vehicles

Current Enforcement and Sanctions Alternatives for Airfield Drivers

The current procedures in place for enforcing the airport-established rules or regulations simply include various types of penalties for violations. Current penalties include monetary fines and/or the revocation or suspension of airport driving privileges; however, there are no incremental penalties involved and airfield drivers are therefore faced with an "all-or-nothing" sanction in cases of inappropriate driving episodes. Because airfield drivers' livelihood is directly tied to their ability to operate rolling stock on airfields, this "all-or-nothing" approach may be less effective than a graduated approach such as provided by a point system because airfield law enforcement authorities may be reluctant to deprive an individual of his or her job because of even a serious infraction.

The primary responsibility for airport vehicle operations is that of the respective airport management. In all cases, the FAA emphasizes the need for airport management to establish written rules or regulations for the safe and orderly operation of vehicles on the airfield. The rules or regulations typically address the following factors:

Vehicle operator requirements;

Vehicle requirements;

Vehicle operations;

Enforcement/sanctions.

The FAA has published Draft AC No. 150/5210-20 Ground Vehicle Operations on Airports. This Draft Advisory Circular includes guidance and strongly recommends regular, recurrent driver training for all persons, airport employees and non-airport employees alike, with access to movement areas and non-movement (ramp and apron) areas. Certificated airports already require both initial and recurrent training for airport employees driving on the ramp. According to FAA, 385 airports in the U.S. have already taken the initiative to require recurrent driving training for all individuals with access to these areas, and another 97 airports are planning to adopt this new requirement. The draft Advisory Circular was released pursuant to the FAA's August 15, 2007 "Call to Action meeting" in which a number of airport members participated (Kellogg, 2009).

Chapter Summary

This chapter provided a review of the relevant literature concerning the aviation industry in general, point systems and drivers' licensure in the several states and abroad, and a discussion concerning current approaches to airfield driver regulation. A more complete description of the study's methodology is provided in Chapter 3 below.

Chapter 3: Methodology

Description of the Study Approach

As noted in the introductory chapter, this study used a mixed methodology consisting of a review of the relevant peer-reviewed, scholarly, organizational and governmental literature together with the results of a custom survey of representative airfield drivers to achieve the above-stated research purpose. This approach is highly congruent with a number of social researchers who emphasize the need to review what is known in virtually any type of research project (Neuman, 2003). For example, Fraenkel and Wallen (2001) report that, "Researchers usually dig into the literature to find out what has already been written about the topic they are interested in investigating. Both the opinions of experts in the field and other research studies are of interest. Such reading is referred to as a review of the literature" (p. 48). In this regard, Gratton and Jones (2003) suggest a review of the relevant literature is an essential task in all types of modern research: "No matter how original you think the research question may be," they advise, "it is almost certain that your work will be building on the work of others. It is here that the review of such existing work is important" (p. 51). Besides identifying what is known, a well conducted literature review should seek to identify what is lacking for the current literature as well. For instance, Gratton and Jones add that, "A literature review is the background to the research, where it is important to demonstrate a clear understanding of the relevant theories and concepts, the results of past research into the area, the types of methodologies and research designs employed in such research, and areas where the literature is deficient" (p. 51). Based on the foregoing, the study followed Wood and Ellis (2003) guidance concerning the important outcomes of a well conducted literature review:

It helps describe a topic of interest and refine either research questions or directions in which to look;

It presents a clear description and evaluation of the theories and concepts that have informed research into the topic of interest;

It clarifies the relationship to previous research and highlights where new research may contribute by identifying research possibilities which have been overlooked so far in the literature;

It provides insights into the topic of interest that are both methodological and substantive;

It demonstrates powers of critical analysis by, for instance, exposing taken for granted assumptions underpinning previous research and identifying the possibilities of replacing them with alternative assumptions;

It justifies any new research through a coherent critique of what has gone before and demonstrates why new research is both timely and important (p. 255).

The primary data for the study was collected using a three-part custom survey instrument (see proforma copy at Appendix a). The first section of the custom survey was used to collect relevant demographic data, the second section consisted of a series of Likert-scaled questions ranged from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree," and the third section consisted of an open-ended comment section wherein the respondents were requested to provide any additional observations, thoughts or insights they may have concerning a graduated point system and airfield driver licensure. All comments received from the respondents in this section were reported verbatim in Chapter 4. The inclusion of primary data is also highly congruent with a number of social researchers who emphasize the need to collect on-point timely data concerning a research topic. In this regard, Dennis and Harris (2002) report that, "Primary data are information that is being collected for the first time in order to address a specific research problem. This means that it is likely to be directly relevant to the research, unlike secondary data, which may be out of date or collected for a totally different purpose. Ideally, an effective research project should incorporate both primary and secondary data" (p. 39). One of the fundamental limitations to using a custom survey, though, is its unknown reliability; however, face validity was achieved pursuant to the guidance provided by Neuman (2003) by circulating the draft survey instrument among colleagues, co-workers, family members, friends and others to ensure that the instrument appeared to collect the type of data desired and did not contain any misleading or ambiguous questions. The statistical data from the custom survey was analyzed using SPSS Version 11.0 (Student Version), and the resulting findings presented in tabular and graphic form and summarized in the concluding chapter.

Data-gathering Method and Database of Study

The data-gathering method used for the study proceeded in two steps. The first step involved a critical review of the relevant literature from peer-reviewed, scholarly, governmental and organizational sources as described above, and the second step involved collecting responses on the custom survey from a convenience sample of ten (10) airfield drivers known to the author who expressed a willingness to participate in this research project and were assured of their anonymity for doing so.

Chapter 4: Data Analysis

Part One: Airfield Operations -- Employment Projections: 2004 to projected 2014

Table 1.

Employment in airfield operations positions, 2004 and projected 2014

Category

2004 Employment

Projected Employment 2014

Airfield operations specialists

Source: Hecker, 2005, p. 73.

Figure 2. Employment in airfield operations positions, 2004 to 2014 (projected).

Source: Based on tabular data in Hecker at p. 73.

Part Two: Custom Survey Results

Section One: Demographic Data

Age: 32.5 years (mean)

Gender: Male: 9 Female: 1

How long in current position? 4 years, 3-month (average)

Have you received driving citation at work in the past? Yes: 3 No: 7

If yes, have many citations have you received? 3 (average)

Section Two: Likert-Scaled Questions

Key:

1. The fear of losing my driving privileges encourages me to drive my vehicle safely.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

2. Airfield drivers should lose their licenses as a result of their poor driving performance.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

3. I have driven my vehicle recklessly, negligently or inattentively in the past without being cited by airfield security personnel.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

4. A graduated point system for airfield driving privileges that would adversely affect my ability to drive would have a real effect on how safely I drive my vehicle.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

5. Airfield operations are dangerous by nature.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

6. I tend to drive more carefully at work than I do in my personal life.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

7. A point system would not affect the way I operate my vehicle at work one way or the other.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

8. I drive more carefully at work than my fellow airfield drivers do.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

9. I expect to remain in my current profession for the foreseeable future.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

10. I have experienced "near-misses" while driving in the past at work.

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

Section Three: Open-Ended Comments.

Accidents happen all the time.

Drivers shouldn't lose their jobs because of an accident since they are just human too.

I've lived in a state with a point system and it seemed to make a difference in how people drove.

A point system would be better than fines that cost me money.

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

Summary

The research showed that the aviation industry is one of the most important in the country today, representing both a strategic and business resource that would be virtually impossible to replace with ground-based alternatives. The research also showed that airport operations are an inherently dangerous enterprise and many airports across the country continue to experience an inordinate number of safety violations and airway incursions involving ground operations. Although there were no earth-shattering results identified from the analysis of the custom survey used in this study, there were some interesting findings. As to demographics, the mean age of the respondents was 32.5 years, and nine of the respondents were male and one was female. The average time in their current position reported by the respondents was 4 years, 3 months. Three of the respondents (or 30%) reported receiving a driving citation at work in the past with an average of three citations being reported for these three respondents.

In response to the statement, "The fear of losing my driving privileges encourages me to drive my vehicle safely," four each of the respondents (or 40% each) either strongly agreed or agreed, and one each (or 10% each) of the respondents either had no opinion or disagreed, respectively. In response to the statement, "Airfield drivers should lose their licenses as a result of their poor driving performance," half of the respondents (or five) strongly agreed, three (or 30%) agreed, one respondent (or 10%) used the "no opinion" option and one respondent (or 10%) disagreed. The responses to the statement, "I have driven my vehicle recklessly, negligently or inattentively in the past without being cited by airfield security personnel," were mixed, with two respondents (or 20%) agreeing, one respondent (or 10%) using the "no opinion" option, five respondents (or 50%) disagreeing and two respondents (or 20%) strongly disagreeing.

In response to the statement, "A graduated point system for airfield driving privileges that would adversely affect my ability to drive would have a real effect on how safely I drive my vehicle," an overwhelming majority (90%) of the respondents either strongly agreed (four or 40%) or agreed (five or 50%). One respondent (or 10%) disagreed. Not surprisingly, all of the respondents either strongly agreed or agreed (eight or 80% and two or 20%, respectively) with the statement that airfield operations are by nature dangerous.

In response to the statement, "I tend to drive more carefully at work than I do in my personal life," six respondents (or 60%) strongly agreed, two respondents (or 20%) agreed, one respondent (or 10%) used the "no opinion" option and one respondent (or 10%) disagreed. All of the respondents either strongly agreed (seven or 70%) or agreed (three or 30%) with the statement, "I expect to remain in my current profession for the foreseeable future." Finally, in response to the statement, "I have experienced "near-misses" while driving in the past at work," four respondents each (or 40% each) strongly agreed or agreed, with one respondent (or 10%) disagreeing and one respondent (or 10%) strongly disagreeing.

In sum, the survey findings show:

majority of the airfield drivers feel a graduated point system would affect the manner in which they operated their vehicles.

Most of the respondents believe they are safer drivers than their coworkers.

All of the respondents expect to remain in their current professions for the foreseeable future.

All of the respondents believe that airfield operations are inherently dangerous.

Many of the respondents have experienced "near-misses" at work.

Conclusions

Based on the review of the relevant literature and an interpolation of the survey results, it is reasonable to conclude that because there are humans involved, airfield ground operations accidents will continue to occur in the future despite the best efforts of airport management and governmental oversight. Therefore, it is also reasonable to conclude that it is vitally important that whatever techniques can make a difference in existing accident rates should be exploited to their maximum advantage. In this regard, current sanction approaches to regulating the licensure of airfield drivers appear to be either ineffectual or inappropriate in certain cases involving a monetary fine or an outright revocation of an airfield driver's license. Therefore, the graduated licensure procedures described above wherein points are assigned for various levels of infractions appears to represent a viable alternative to existing sanction techniques.

Recommendations

Taken together, the foregoing analysis suggests that the following recommendations would be appropriate:

Increase driver training opportunities and the frequency of refresher training.

Implement a point system as a pilot test in a representative sampling of airport facilities in different regions of the country to assess its impact on reported accident rates.

Survey airfield ground operators to gain additional insights into what steps can be taken to improve the safety of operations across the country.